<HTML>Anthony -
I beg to differ on a crucial point. A "belief" does not stand as valid until disproven. The precise inverese is the case: a theory is formulated on testable evidence. Otherwise, it is untestable belief. There is a huge difference. The range of beliefs that cannot be disproven is close to infinite. But the range of historical conclusions is not infinite. For example, I could believe that Caesar was an alien. There is no way that belief could be disproven by any evidence. Does it therefore stand as valid until disproven (which it can't be)? Do we rewrite the history books to include the possibility that Caesar was an alien?
Historical analysis proceeds from the evidence, not in spite of it.
So West's comment was instructive, precisely because it showed that (a) his "belief" (not "theory" or "hypothesis") came first, and (b) it would go on being valid until decisively <i>proven</i>. I saw no recognition at all that his belief in Atlantis could be <i>disproven</i>.
Garrett</HTML>
